---

Company Law Reform Bill [HL]

moved Amendment No. 300MA:"Page 131, line 32, leave out paragraph (b)." The noble Lord said: Clause 296(1) provides that provisions of a company’s articles can exclude the right to demand a poll where the issue concerns,"““(a) the election of the chairman of the meeting, or"" (b) the adjournment of the meeting””." We have no problem with the provision in paragraph (a) but we have problems with paragraph (b). The amendment seeks to change the Bill to remove the ability to refuse a poll in the case of a proposal to adjourn the meeting. In our view the adjournment of a meeting can be extremely important for a number of reasons. For example, a group of shareholders might have had to make special arrangements to get together specifically for the meeting. Some might have had to travel from a long way away—say, from overseas. A very good way to frustrate them would be to propose the adjournment of the meeting on some technicality in the knowledge that the group would have difficulty getting together for any subsequent meeting. By contrast, we accept that the election of the chairman of the meeting is far less controversial. It is right that members should be able to call for a poll on whether there should be an adjournment, without the restrictions of the articles overriding them. I beg to move.